All posts by Bridget Eileen Novielli and Addie Rabold

ADAPTIVE REUSE IN DETROIT

PROPOSED PERIODICAL: CITY LAB

    On July 18, 2013, the city of Detroit filed for Chapter 9 bankruptcy. A city that once was bustling with citizens and a booming automotive industry has since suffered economic turmoil. Its people left after the success of the postwar years, a 63% decrease in population since 1950 (Hobbs and Stoop 2002). Most startling is the amount of unused, abandoned land. There are currently 78,000 structures accompanied by 66,000 lots currently sitting idle, falling to ruin in the city of Detroit. These abandoned sites become magnets for violent crimes, but through adaptive reuse they could see an alternative fate of bringing sustainability, cultural value, and economic development to Detroit. Rather than allowing old, industrial buildings to fall to ruin, the city of Detroit should incentivize private investors to revitalize these buildings to become sustainable and viable centers of activity through adaptive reuse.

    Detroit needs revitalizing through adaptive reuse. Adaptive reuse is the act of creating new built opportunities within existing built forms, often abandoned and in unceasing decay. Adaptive reuse can accommodate for the social, political and economic progress within a community. It is found most often that abandoned, industrial buildings are located in prime, dynamic spaces such as along a waterfront or in proximity to historic landmarks. It is a sustainable approach for architectural design, especially in cities such as Detroit.

    There are crucial steps to successfully implement adaptive reuse projects in Detroit. The first step is to evaluate existing conditions. Designers should thoroughly evaluate the existing fabric in order to make the most of the conditions and former structural, mechanical, electrical, architectural and landscape systems. The second step is to update systems to comply with current codes. Most issues with code compliance have to deal with energy standards, accessibility and fire regulations. The next step is to insert contextual program. The context must be highly considered in order to insert effective program. Industrial spaces are most effectively converted into to retail and community spaces.

Why is adaptive reuse the solution to Detroit?

An existing building has ecological, cultural, economic, and financial value. Instead of inevitably becoming a burden on a community, an industrial building can serve as a hub for urban life and create opportunities for natural urban development.

  1. Sustainability. Reusing the existing structure decreases the environmental damage resulting from transportation and production of materials.
  2. Improving cultural value and identity. Enhancing the identity of a culture maintains history and memory in place while providing new function for its survival. Bringing authenticity to a site also acknowledges the significance of an existing use and space.
  3. Embracing development of economy. Repurposing a building helps accommodate cultural changes because “Adaptive re-use projects speak to a wider cultural shift – from an industrial and manufacturing based economy to one centered around services, education and cultural life” (Harrison 2014).
  4. Net cost can be less than new construction. Consuming less energy and using fewer building materials, the net cost of an adaptive reuse project can be less than new construction (Thornton 2011). Although sometimes the initial cost of adaptive reuse is more, as the cost of energy continues to rise, new construction becomes a more expensive option when considering its life cycle.

    Other major cities have utilized adaptive reuse to capture these values that abandoned structures bring to urban life. Ghirardelli Square was the first successful example of adaptive reuse seen in the United States. In the 1960s, the existing factory buildings were 

www.ghirardellisq.com
Ghirardelli Square, circa early 1900s                            www.ghirardellisq.com

purchased by William Roth, who hired Lawrence Halprin, landscape architect, and Wurster, Bernardi & Emmons architectural firm to create a design to accommodate retail spaces, offices, restaurants and a movie theater (Sharpe 2012). This project preserved the history and authenticity of the site, prevented the demolition of a storied building, and developed a new economic center, serving as a strong example of values 2 and 3. 

Across the country, the Brewery in Milwaukee presents a strong case for values 1, 2 and 3 in a very extensive and ambitious project that plans for the adaptive reuse and “environmentally sensitive restoration” amongst the remains of the Pabst Brewing Company (Benfield 2011).

Courtesy Jeramey Jannene, licensed under Wikimedia Commons
The Brewery, 2011                                                  Courtesy Jeramey Jannene, licensed under Wikimedia Commons

The master plan of this project by Joseph Zilber includes residential lofts, a beer hall, office space, educational campuses, urban parks, senior living facilities, and medical campuses with more retail and luxury spaces to develop in the future. The success of this project relies on the cooperation between the developers, the city, and the LEED Neighborhood Development program. While this is a project under various stages of development, the existing structures that have been built have successfully brought community and life into a previously abandoned space.

    In Detroit, Michigan Central Station and Harbor Terminal offer great opportunity for adaptive reuse because of their size, space and location. Michigan Central Station is a critical structure for adaptive reuse. With a space large enough for a train on the ground floor and an 18 story tower with hotel and office space above, this is prime real estate sitting vacant. An approach like that of Ghirardelli Square would be ideal, so that the history of the site and building may be preserved, bringing back the heyday of Detroit with a new era of use, featuring offices, retail space, and residential living. This site would be an excellent opportunity for all four values. Reusing existing structure conserves materials and cost. The quality and ornateness of existing materials are so expensive in today’s market, that this saves a quantifiable amount of money and preserves the original beauty. The cultural improvement will be immediately evident through restoration with a visual link to the history of Detroit. The creation of new retail space allows the community to effortlessly embrace new economic development.

Photographer: Zach Fein
Michigan Central Station                                                                      Architects: Warren & Wetmore and Reed & Stem, 1913          Photographer: Zach Fein

    Another potential site is the Harbor Terminal building. This huge warehouse currently sits vacant, but is an ideal candidate for adaptive reuse that could be turned into a multi-functional building with the creation of new waterfront urban space along the Detroit River as well. If the remains of the Pabst Brewing Company can be given a new life, why not this warehouse? While this could potentially be a more costly proposition, values 1, 2, and 3 could still be achieved. Materials would be conserved as the existing shell of the warehouse space allows for program to be directly inserted inside. By developing a new waterfront space, a new community center would be created along with a new economic hub and destination for not only residents of Detroit, but tourists as well.

Zack Fein
Harbor Terminal Building, 1925                                   Photographer:Zack Fein

    The obstacle to implementing adaptive reuse in Detroit is the financial commitment needed to update systems and meet today’s code requirements. While preserving the history of a site is a very integral component of design, to private investors this does not always make adaptive reuse worth the financial obligations. Adaptive reuse can be a very financially involved and time intensive project. It is not always as simple as taking an old building and moving in new program. The mechanical and HVAC systems of these abandoned buildings are often out of date (if they even still function) and require extensive updates and installation of new modern systems. These systems are expensive to install for large buildings, and become even more expensive with the increase of sustainable measures (Donofrio 2012). Additionally, older buildings often do not meet today’s code and accessibility requirements. This may involve moving existing walls and structural elements in an attempt to make it compliant. While designers may love the opportunity to bring back the glory of an old architectural wonder, investors will often only see the dollars signs associated with doing such a task. For many investors it is cheaper to tear down a building and start from scratch. With all the necessary updates and adjustments that require extensive funds and construction, many say why bother with adaptive reuse?

    Although the initial costs may be greater, the adaptive reuse of an existing building is the answer to revitalizing Detroit. For private investors who don’t see the value of cultural and historic preservation, there is a monetary incentive in place. For a site like Michigan Central Station on the National Register of Historic Places, a 20% income tax credit is available. Meanwhile, Harbor Terminal Building, being built before 1936, is eligible for a 10% income tax credit (U.S. National Park Service 2010). This program offered by the Internal Revenue Service and National Park Service encourages private sector investment in adaptive reuse that allows the preservation of historic sites, while creating jobs and revitalizing communities. Private investors and the local government can both benefit from a system like this.

    Through the designer’s efforts to evaluate existing conditions, meet code compliance, and insert contextual program, adaptive reuse will offer an opportunity for Michigan Central Station and Harbor Terminal to revitalize the city of Detroit. Seeing the success of great urban works in cities such as Milwaukee and San Francisco, we believe adaptive reuse is the future for the success of revitalizing cities in our coming generation. We can take these old buildings, install updated systems, insert new program, and create a sustainable, viable space for the community. We believe that adaptive reuse could be just the change Detroit needs. While proposals have been made for sites such as Michigan Central Station, no actual renovation has begun. Through tax incentives, local government support, and community engagement, adaptive reuse can revitalize Detroit.

 

REFERENCES

Benfield, Kaid. “A Green Neighborhood Brewing in Milwaukee.” CityLab. The Atlantic, 22 Sept. 2011. Web. 25 Oct. 2015.

Binder, Melinda. “Adaptive Reuse and Sustainable Design: A Holistic Approach for Abandoned Industrial Buildings.” University of Cincinnati, 2003.

Hobbs, Frank and Stoops, Nicole. “Demographic Trends in the 20th Century; Census 2000 Special Reports” Decennial Census of Population, 1900 to 2000.  U.S. Census Bureau, Nov. 2002. Web. 10 Dec. 2015.

Donofrio, Gregory. “Preservation by Adaptation: Is it Sustainable?” Change Over Time 2.2 (2012): 106-31.

Harrison, Stuart. Adaptive Re-use. Adelaide: Office for Design and Architecture, 2014. Odasa.sa.gov.au. Web.

Sharpe, Sara E., “Revitalizing Cities: Adaptive Reuse of Historic Structures” (2012). Mid-America College Art Association Conference 2012 Digital Publications. Paper 18.

Spivak, Jeffrey. “Adaptive Use Is Reinventing Detroit.” Urban Land Magazine. The Magazine of the Urban Land Institute, 14 Sept. 2015. Web. 24 Sept. 2015.

Thornton, BJ. “The Greenest Building (Is The One That You Don’t Build!) Effective Techniques for Sustainable Adaptive Reuse/Renovation.” Journal of Green Building 6.1 (2011; 1901): 1-7.

U.S. National Park Service. “Tax Incentives—Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service.” National Parks Service. U.S. Department of the Interior, 2010. Web. 09 Dec. 2015.

Featured Image by Zach Fein http://zfein.com/photography/detroit/mcs/index.html

design development review: veronica landron

Veronica’s design for the Brooklyn Fire Station revolves around a geometric roof. The roof serves as a visual icon among the rigid rectangular forms in its context along a historically industrial waterfront. It offers a unique opportunity for structural flexibility for the large apparatus and other related program within. The roof takes a very interesting form because of its geodesic qualities, however, the current design does not take full advantage of the system the roof creates. To finalize the structure and cohesiveness of systems needed for the final design, Veronica should create a series of rules that will organize and bring unity to the roof structure and the program within the firehouse.

SUCCESS OF PROJECT

Veronica’s design for the firehouse is successful in engaging the surrounding environment with a geometric roof. The roof structure is clearly the most interesting part of this project. It attracts attention because of its visual uniqueness. For the specific program of a firehouse, this structure presents an opportunity because of the openness it allows for the apparatus. With less columns, there can be flexible interpretations of the space within the roof. The design does not yet take advantage of this flexibility to develop a relationship between the interior spaces and the roof.

One commendable aspect of Veronica’s project are her efforts with structural design. However, the efforts have produced 3 different structural systems that must be resolved into a clear structure. Currently, there are structural systems of walls, columns and the dome. These systems are conflicting. The critics suggest that the structural walls should not be necessary and are not in agreement with your concept. Also, the additional columns inside do not follow a structural logic.

In addition, the critics suggested that the structural idea is there but it needs to be carried out more rigorously through the programmatic organization. The dormitory is the current exception to the interior because it is on a diagonal. The firetrucks could also follow a diagonal logic with their circulation.  The relationship between the interpretations of the interior spaces needs resolution. These issues can be resolved through clarifying the structural system.

Overall, I think Veronica represented her ideas well. A strong element of this presentation is the use of models. The models are both effective to visualize the shape and test the structure. There was a strong analysis of precedent through the Geodesic dome and similar structures. Veronica has clearly explored various structural systems that could support her form. Her challenge now is to clarify her own design among these precedents.

With so much emphasis placed on the structural system, there was little feedback on her other systems, sustainability, and site design. It appears as if you have considered natural light and ventilation, and I would encourage you to reevaluate the other systems in collaboration with the structure.

CRITIQUE OF CRITIQUE

In the design development phase of design, the critique focused on the Industrial and Civic Orders of Worth. At this point, our designs have developed beyond the conceptual phase and the building systems take focus. There was a strong and immediate focus on the Industrial order. One of the major factors of evaluation was the roof structure. Acknowledging the geodesic nature, one of the first questions asked was the location of the utilities. The comments were related to the efficiency of the systems and organization of the program within the dome. Issues such as water runoff and column placement inside were brought up. The structural system was thoroughly analyzed in terms of its rules. The critics suggested that if something breaks a rule, it must be special. They said your design should follow its own rules that you must determine.

There was also a focus on the Civic order. The reviewer’s comments addressed legal and ethical obligations such as code and fire safety. Fire separation within such an open structure was brought up almost immediately.

They referenced the Inspired and Fame orders by acknowledging the value and uniqueness of the roof. The form gives the firehouse a unique public image. They addressed the Project element of design by offering advice to work through a model.  

SUGGESTIONS

To resolve your structural system, I would recommend using models to further explore either the roof folding down or columns. This will help you determine a structural and organizational logic to follow. Determine the hierarchy of your elements and stick to that hierarchy. The roof is the most important element, followed by the living quarters, the program inside and the entrance. The columns should have the same fold as the points you created at the end conditions. The main street facade would be more engaging to the passerbyers if it followed the natural geometries of the roof instead of having a flat surface.

In creating a uniform logic for the structure, this will also provide opportunity to resolve other systems. There is an opportunity to integrate this system with water-down and technical systems. Also, you could find additional ways to allow light and air in your building. One comment was that you should place additional skylights above areas that need it.

There is not a strong emphasis on site design in this project. I think there is an opportunity for you to continue the logic of your roof to create engaging spaces throughout the park. You could have a canopy that uses the same form as your building. You could also use your geometric pattern to create seating and circulation around your building. In developing the outdoor courtyards, you could continue the logic of the structure outside by revealing it.

The roof attracts attention because of its form, but also because of its materiality. I think you could use a material on the roof that utilizes the heat it attracts. In terms of sustainability I think you have made efforts to harness natural elements and you should continue to do so. Overall, I think you have a strong concept and developed system that with clarity will become a distinguished and comprehensive design.

DD Project Statement

    In its context along a developing waterfront, the Brooklyn fire station serves to increase flow between the urban and natural environments with a dynamic plaza while using solid and void to create a dialogue between the public and private uses on the site. The plaza leads from the busy street, through the fire station complex to a museum and dock at the water’s edge. The experience of moving through this space offers views of firefighters in action in the apparatus, companies in training in the education center, a historical fire truck in the main lobby, and the destination of the park with its grand view to the Manhattan skyline. Another pathway flows through the site along the west side of the fire station, offering bikers and city goers views into the fire station on one side and to the skyline of Manhattan on the other. This path provides a connection to the developing area to the north of the site. The plaza itself forms an enticing void between the fire station and fire education center, drawing in the passerbyers within the site. The two distinct buildings offer an effective division of public and private spaces for security, enhanced spatial interaction, and sustainable design. Referencing an industrial heritage, materiality is more solid facing the urban context, with dissolution of the materials toward the south sun and sloping site of the water. Offering a dynamic experience of depth through the plaza, the fire station engages public interest from the street and throughout the waterfront while maintaining a firm yet sustainable presence on the site.

ADAPTIVE REUSE IN DETROIT

PROPOSED PERIODICAL: CITY LAB

POST TITLE: Adaptive Reuse in Detroit

THESIS: Rather than allowing old, industrial buildings fall to ruin, the city of Detroit should revitalize these buildings to become sustainable and viable centers of activity through adaptive reuse.

I. INTRODUCTION

    On July 18, 2013, the city of Detroit filed for Chapter 9 bankruptcy. A city that once was bustling full of citizens and a booming automotive industry has since suffered economic turmoil. Its people left after the success of the postwar years, a 63% decrease in population since 1950 and a 26% decrease since 2000. The unemployment rate varies from 27.8% (2009) to 10% (2015). It has the largest violent crime rate seen in any city in the United States. Most startling is the amount of unused, abandoned land. There are currently 78,000 structures accompanied by 66,000 lots currently sitting idle, falling to ruin in the city of Detroit. These abandoned sites become magnets to violent crimes with 60% of reported arson cases happening here. Rather than allowing old, industrial buildings fall to ruin, the city of Detroit should revitalize these buildings to become sustainable and viable centers of activity through adaptive reuse.

II. Detroit is in need of revitalizing through adaptive reuse.

A. what adaptive reuse is

  • Adaptive reuse is the act of creating new built opportunities within existing built forms. It involves the repurposing of a structure that is usually abandoned and in unceasing decay. Adaptive reuse can accommodate for the social, political and economic progress within a community. It is found most often that these abandoned, industrial buildings are located in prime, dynamic spaces such as along a waterfront or in proximity to historic landmarks. It is a sustainable approach for architectural design, especially in cities such as Detroit.

B. why adaptive reuse is the solution

  1. sustainability – By reusing the existing structure we decrease the environmental pressure resulting from transportation and production of materials.
  2. improves cultural value and identity – A space revamped by adaptive reuse enhances the identity of a culture by maintaining history and memory in place while providing new function for its survival. It brings authenticity to a site by acknowledging the significance of an existing use and space.
  3. embraces development of economy – The repurposing of a building helps accommodate cultural changes because “Adaptive re-use projects speak to a wider cultural shift – from an industrial and manufacturing based economy to one centred around services, education and cultural life” (Harrison). 
  4. net cost can be less than new construction – The net cost of an adaptive reuse project can be less than new construction because it consumes less energy and uses fewer building materials. As the cost of energy continues to rise, new construction becomes a more expensive option when considering its life cycle.

An existing building has cultural, economic, and financial value. Instead of inevitably becoming a burden on a community, an industrial building can serve as a hub for urban life and create opportunities for natural urban development.

III. Other major cities have utilized adaptive reuse for abandoned structures to revitalize the city.

Adaptive reuse has proven successful in other industrial locations such as the Highline Park in New York City’s Meatpacking district, Ghirardelli Square in San Francisco, and The Brewery in Milwaukee. The ability to bring life to these once booming industrial centers is key to bringing life to the city as a whole once more.

  1. San Francisco, Ghirardelli Square – Ghirardelli Square was the first successful example of adaptive reuse seen in the United States. In the 1960s, the existing factory buildings were purchased by William Roth, who hired Lawrence Halprin, landscape architect, and Wurster, Bernardi & Emmons, architectural firm, to create a design to accommodate retail spaces, offices, restaurants and a movie theater (Sharpe). This project preserved the history and original atmosphere of the site, preventing the demolition of a storied building and construction of a new modern apartment building. 

    www.ghirardellisq.com
    www.ghirardellisq.com
  2. New York City, High Line – High Line Park is a great example of adaptive reuse that takes an existing, abandoned railroad line and creates a beautiful landscape elevated from urban context of the city. Designed by Diller Scofidio + Renfro, the High Line is an extremely successful example of adaptive reuse that both the community and tourists love and actively use. While the project was extremely expensive, the preservation of history and popularity amongst the city’s population made it a worthwhile investment. 

    Rendering by Field Operations and Diller Scofidio + Renfro/Courtesy the City of New York
    Rendering by Field Operations and Diller Scofidio + Renfro/Courtesy the City of New York
  3. Milwaukee, Brewery – The Brewery in Milwaukee is a very extensive and ambitious project that plans for the adaptive reuse and “environmentally sensitive restoration” of 26 structures on the National Register of Historic Places, a brownfield cleanup, and creation of low income housing amongst the remains of the Pabst Brewing Company (Benfield). The master plan of this project by Joseph Zilber includes residential lofts, a beer hall, office space, educational campuses, urban parks, senior living facilities, and medical campuses with more retail and luxury spaces to develop in the future. This success of this project relies on the cooperation between the developers and the city and the LEED Neighborhood Development program. 

    Courtesy Jeramey Jannene, licensed under Wikimedia Commons
    Courtesy Jeramey Jannene, licensed under Wikimedia Commons

IV. methods of adaptive reuse: how to revitalize a building

  1. Evaluate existing conditions- A great amount of effort should be dedicated to evaluating the existing fabric in order to make the most of the conditions. Designers look into the former structural, mechanical, electrical, architectural and landscape systems.
  2. Meet codes and install updated systems – To revitalize an existing structure, the design team must update systems to comply with current codes. Most issues with code compliance have to deal with energy standards, accessibility and fire regulations.
  3. Insert contextual program – The factor that determines the ultimate success of an adaptive reuse project is what will go inside it. The context must be highly considered in order to insert effective program. Industrial spaces are most effectively converted into to retail and community spaces.

V. Michigan Central Station, Harbor Terminal, and Hotel Eddystone offer great opportunity for adaptive reuse because of their size, space and location.

  1. Michigan Central Station – Michigan Central Station is a critical structure for adaptive reuse. With a space large enough for a train on the ground floor and an 18 story tower with hotel and office space above, this is prime real estate sitting vacant. An approach like that of Ghirardelli Square would be ideal, so that the history of the site and building may be preserved, bringing back the heyday of Detroit with a new era of use featuring offices, retail space, and residential living. 

    Photographer: Zach Fein
    Photographer: Zach Fein
  2. Harbor Terminal – Another site is the Harbor Terminal building. This huge warehouse currently sits vacant, but is an ideal candidate for adaptive reuse that could be turned into a multi-functional building with the creation of new waterfront urban space along the Detroit River as well. If the remain of the Pabst Brewing Company, can be given a new life, why not this warehouse? 

    Zack Fein
    Zack Fein
  3. Hotel Eddystone and Park Avenue Hotels – These hotels are other great locations for adaptive reuse. These abandoned hotels can serve as the catalyst for creating a new social center that also has a sustainable emphasis, by preventing the demolition of historic landmarks and reusing the existing structure. These hotels could be prime candidates for the LEED Neighborhood Development program. 

    www.architonic.com
    www.architonic.com

VII. the other side: why isn’t adaptive reuse happening?

  1. money required to update systems – While preserving the history of a site is a very integral component of design, too many this does not always make adaptive reuse the solution. Adaptive reuse can be a very financially involved and time intensive project. It is not always as simple as buy old building, move in new program. The mechanical and HVAC systems of these abandoned buildings are often out of date (if they even still function) and require extensive updates and installation of new modern systems. These systems are expensive to install for large buildings, and become even more expensive with the increase of sustainable measures.
  2. today’s code requirements – Older buildings often do not meet today’s code and accessibility requirements. This may involve moving existing walls and structural elements and changing floor plans in attempts to make it compliant with the rules of today.

While designers may love the opportunity to bring back the glory of an old architectural wonder, developers will often only see the dollars signs associated with doing such a  task. For many developers it is cheaper to tear down a building, and start from scratch.  With all the necessary updates and adjustments that require extensive funds and construction, many say why bother with adaptive reuse?

VIII. conclusion

Through the city’s efforts to evaluate existing conditions, meet code compliance, and insert contextual program, adaptive reuse will offer an opportunity for the Central Station, Harbor Terminal, and Hotel Eddystone in order to revitalize the city of Detroit. Seeing the success of great urban works in cities such as Pittsburgh, San Francisco, and New York City, we believe adaptive reuse is the future for the success of revitalizing cities in our coming generation. We can take these old buildings, install updated systems, insert new program, and create a sustainable, viable space for the community. We believe that adaptive reuse could be just the change Detroit needs. While proposals have been made for sites such as Michigan Central Station, no actual renovation has begun. Action is needed.

REFERENCES

  • Benfield, Kaid. “A Green Neighborhood Brewing in Milwaukee.” CityLab. The Atlantic, 22 Sept. 2011. Web. 25 Oct. 2015.
  • BINDER, MELINDA LORR. “ADAPTIVE REUSE AND SUSTAINABLE DESIGN: A HOLISTIC APPROACH FOR ABANDONED INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS.” University of Cincinnati / OhioLINK, 2003.
  • Donofrio, Gregory. “Preservation by Adaptation: Is it Sustainable?” Change Over Time 2.2 (2012): 106-31.
  • Harrison, Stuart. Adaptive Re-use. Adelaide: Office for Design and Architecture, 2014. Odasa.sa.gov.au. Web.
  • Green, Jessica M. “Adaptive Reuse in Post-Industrial Detroit: Testing the Viability of the Engine Works.” ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2008.
  • Hollander, Justin B., Niall Kirkwood, and Julia L. Gold. Principles of Brownfield Regeneration: Cleanup, Design, and Reuse of Derelict Land. Washington: Island Press, 2010.
  • Meltzer, Emily. “Adaptive Reuse of the Seaholm Power Plant: Uniting Historic Preservation and Sustainable Practices.” ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2011.
  • Ro, Sam. “11 Depressing Stats About Detroit.” Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 18 July 2013. Web. 24 Sept. 2015.
  • Sharpe, Sara E., “Revitalizing Cities: Adaptive Reuse of Historic Structures” (2012). Mid-America College Art Association Conference 2012 Digital Publications. Paper 18.
  • Spivak, Jeffrey. “Adaptive Use Is Reinventing Detroit.” Urban Land Magazine. The Magazine of the Urban Land Institute, 14 Sept. 2015. Web. 24 Sept. 2015.
  • Thornton, BJ. “THE GREENEST BUILDING (IS THE ONE THAT YOU DON’T BUILD!) Effective Techniques for Sustainable Adaptive Reuse/Renovation.” JOURNAL OF GREEN BUILDING 6.1 (2011; 1901): 1-7.

SCHEMATIC DESIGN REVIEW – Ali Pugliese

 LA Museum of the Holocaust Found on lamoth.org

LA Museum of the Holocaust
Found on lamoth.org

Ali’s design for the Brooklyn Fire Station has an emphasis on horizontality that stems from its ground plane geometries. The design was created by extending the surrounding urban street grids through the natural site on the waterfront. This grid forms the geometries of the buildings on site. The current design of the firehouse is strong in plan but needs resolution in section. The design suggests a volume filled by stacking program however, by designing in section, this project has potential to develop dynamic spaces. Ali has created strong geometries that need to be further emphasized in this stage of design.

SUCCESS OF PROJECT

The overall design for the firehouse engages the urban context with its proximity to the street and linear geometry. However, the site design does not offer an apparent relationship between the buildings on the site. In order to fully take advantage of the natural environment, I would suggest development of the land with circulation or a park feature to connect the buildings. The circulation path between your buildings and the current void that acts as an entrance are not effective – you could just go around the building! I would reevaluate the monitor museum’s position and orientation toward the firehouse to address this issue.

In terms of the firehouse, the two parts of the main building lack relationship in height. One major element of feedback was the need for design in section. The current program seems to have been designed well in plan without considering dynamics of the spaces. It seems to be stuffed within and above the apparatus. One suggestion is that the building could taper down instead of maintaining the same height throughout. Some spaces could have a full height while others inhabit one level or the other. The program would benefit by allowing natural light into the apparatus. I thought one of the most interesting features were the interior courtyard spaces within the firefighter’s residential areas. By providing natural light and an outdoor recreation space, the design addresses the industrial and domestic orders. By working in section, you can continue to adjust the program for more dynamic space in the building.

The design in plan is organized efficiently but seems to be losing some of the conceptual geometries. I think it is a strong gesture to separate the visitor station from fire station with your lobby. One suggestion by the reviewers is to draw the way the trucks will drive through – this might reinforce the earlier conceptual language you had. By engaging the geometries with the ground plane you will make your project stronger.

The structural system within the space is not apparent. The critics asked if the structure was intended to create an open span throughout the apparatus. Although you suggested the column structure allows for potential large open space, the organization of rooms within the apparatus does not take advantage of this space. Allow for the structure and the interior spaces to compliment each other.

A strong element of this presentation is use of precedent. The program within a firehouse offers a unique challenge of the balance of separation. The precedent you have of a mostly glass fire house offers an excellent analysis of light as well as public and private division. It provides an effective way to show off firetrucks while maintaining safety and security.

 

CRITIQUE OF CRITIQUE

At schematic design, the critique focused on the Inspired and Fame orders. One of the major factors of evaluation is the experience of the user in the site. The critics question how the design will serve as inspiration and how the public will view the structure. They offered general aesthetic suggestions before functional. The critics suggested the plan of the building was working but lacked sectional design, addressing the Industrial order, the efficiency of the program within. They addressed the Project element of design by offering advice to work in section and model.

Another major focus of the critique was questioning the graphics. It is at this stage where design is between an abstraction and realistic. They questioned whether your perspectives are meant to be realistic and your plans included structure.

There was no discussion on whether the design addressed apparent codes and regulations with fire stairs, ignoring the Civic order of legalities. It is our responsibility to address this order as one of the most important even though it was not a point of discussion. At this stage there was little attention drawn to the building envelope systems or building service systems. In the education setting, it appears as if the Market order is completely ignored.

 

SUGGESTIONS

A fundamental aspect that this project lacks is a clear grasp of concept. My first reaction is that the overall visual communication of ideas is not cohesive. Giving your project a title and better utilizing a graphic theme might help you clarify your intentions. A diagram of how you generated the form of the building would also clarify the concept for the audience.

Consider the perspective that the user will experience at all moments. In terms of the design, I would also suggest horizontal and vertical variation. Include structure in plans and sections so that you can see how these systems work together. The streamlined facade and flat roofs do not engage those who experience the site from the street. The orientation of the firehouse exposes most of its surface area to a view of the monitor museum and the New York City skyline. Look at the view out of the firehouse to ensure the museum does not block the view. The Monitor museum has potential to address the view of Manhattan. One suggestion is to place the museum on water’s edge and include the steps as part of landscape rather than inside the building.

Be clear with your intention of the perspectives being realistic or conceptual by the graphic language. They are currently not from a human perspective. It would also be helpful to show where perspectives are coming from in your drawings – with a key on the site plan that indicates the view.
One element of evaluation I think should be included to judge success is the process. I have seen your dedication to solving structural issues through your models, but this is not apparent at a review. At this stage, we are often hesitant to display the work in progress, the issues that have not been resolved. However, the designer would benefit the most from critique of these unresolved issues. I would suggest that you do not discredit your own work by saying something is bad! Overall, I think you have a clear grasp of the use of the spaces with potential for dynamic design.